Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Election Is Going To Be A Barnburner

Center-left candidate Rebecca Dallet and conservative Michael Screnock will face off next week in a technically nonpartisan election for a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat.

Scott Walker’s fight with his state’s judiciary over his efforts to avoid two state legislative special elections — which he has now abandoned — hasn’t been the only Wisconsin news involving judges or elections. Next Tuesday voters will decide a contest for a position on the state’s Supreme Court, and it looks to be an unlikely barnburner.

It’s actually a regular, not a special, election, despite its isolated timing; the state’s judicial elections have their own timetable. It’s also not technically a partisan battle; it’s officially a nonpartisan race in this hyperpartisan state. And the outcome won’t even fundamentally change the ideological balance on the Supreme Court: a win by center-left circuit court judge and former prosecutor Rebecca Dallet over conservative activist turned lawyer and judge Michael Screnock would simply reduce the court’s conservative majority from 5–2 to 4–3.

But this is Wisconsin, ground zero for partisan polarization, so even this election is a cage match. It was set up by a primary contest on February 20 that mostly served to eliminate a third, more liberal candidate (Tim Burns). At stake is a ten-year term on the court; the current occupant, conservative Michael Gableman, declined to run for another term. Dallet’s campaign is viewed by her supporters as a waystation to a possible liberal majority on the court after the 2020 elections. They are playing chess, not checkers.

The Dallet/Screnock competition, as aired out in ads and a series of debates, has been pretty noisy for a judicial contest, albeit predictable: Screnock accuses Dallet of being a lefty zealot who wants to legislate from the bench, while Dallet accuses Screnock of being a puppet for the corporate groups closely aligned with Walker. Dallet probably made a mistake with remarks to donors in San Francisco saying she shared their “values,” but it’s unlikely that will matter to persuadable voters (if there are any) any more than Screnock’s two arrests back in 1989 for illegal protests at abortion clinics.

Both candidates are drawing significant support from “outside” organizations. Dallet has received contributions from Eric Holder’s National Democratic Redistricting Committee, and Holder himself has stumped for her. She’s also gotten some support from For Our Future PAC, a group formed by billionaire Tom Steyer in conjunction with major unions. Screnock is being backed by the NRA and the state and national business lobbies who are strongly supporting the Wisconsin GOP’s assaults on unions, state employees, and voting rights. The Koch-affiliated Americans for Prosperity has been working to turn out the conservative vote in the race.

It’s hard to say which candidate has the advantage. Republicans have been over-performing in Wisconsin in recent years, as reflected in Scott Walker’s serial wins and the upsets pulled in 2016 by Senator Ron Johnson and (of course) Donald Trump. But anti-Trump sentiment and Democratic enthusiasm could tilt the balance back towars Dallet. Screnock won 46 percent of the vote in the primary, but may struggle to get much of third-place finisher Tim Burns’s 18 percent (Dallet won 36 percent). Polling shows mostly indifference: A survey released earlier this month by the respected Marquette Law School polling outfit showed that 81 percent of voters didn’t know enough about Screnock to form a clear opinion of him; 77 percent didn’t know squat about Dallet.

Turnout in recent Supreme Court elections in Wisconsin has averaged an abysmal 7.3 percent. So Tuesday’s contest is above all a statewide tune-up for the voter mobilization efforts both parties intend to deploy in November, when both Scott Walker and Democratic senator Tammy Baldwin will be on the ballot. It’s a big deal for the court itself and for the lawyers and interest groups with business before it. But for political people, it’s just another skirmish in one of America’s most intense partisan wars.

As we anticipate the end of Mueller, signs of a wind-down:-SCO prosecutors bringing family into the office for visits-Staff carrying out boxes-Manafort sentenced, top prosecutor leaving-office of 16 attys down to 10-DC US Atty stepping up in cases-grand jury not seen in 2mo

For Boeing and other aircraft manufacturers, the practice of charging to upgrade a standard plane can be lucrative. Top airlines around the world must pay handsomely to have the jets they order fitted with customized add-ons.

Sometimes these optional features involve aesthetics or comfort, like premium seating, fancy lighting or extra bathrooms. But other features involve communication, navigation or safety systems, and are more fundamental to the plane’s operations.

Many airlines, especially low-cost carriers like Indonesia’s Lion Air, have opted not to buy them — and regulators don’t require them. Now, in the wake of the two deadly crashes involving the same jet model, Boeing will make one of those safety features standard as part of a fix to get the planes in the air again.

… Boeing’s optional safety features, in part, could have helped the pilots detect any erroneous readings. One of the optional upgrades, the angle of attack indicator, displays the readings of the two sensors. The other, called a disagree light, is activated if those sensors are at odds with one another.

Boeing will soon update the MCAS software, and will also make the disagree light standard on all new 737 Max planes, according to a person familiar with the changes, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they have not been made public. The angle of attack indicator will remain an option that airlines can buy.

Attorneys for New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and more than a dozen other defendants charged in a Florida prostitution sting filed a motion to stop the public release of surveillance videos and other evidence taken by police.

Attorneys filed the motion Wednesday in Palm Beach County court. The State of Florida does not agree with the request, according to the filing.

In the motion, the attorneys asked the court to grant a protective order to safeguard the confidentiality of the materials seized from the Orchids of Asia Day Spa in Jupiter, and “in particular the videos, until further order of the court.”

Two years in, White House aides are dismayed to discover the president likes lobbing pointless, nasty attacks at people like George Conway and John McCain

But the saga has left even White House aides accustomed to a president who bucks convention feeling uncomfortable. While the controversies may have pushed aside some bad news, they also trampled on Trump’s Wednesday visit to an army tank manufacturing plant in swing state Ohio.

“For the most part, most people internally don’t want to touch this with a 10-foot pole,” said one former senior White House official. A current senior White House official said White House aides are making an effort “not to discuss it in polite company.” Another current White House official bemoaned the tawdry distraction. “It does not appear to be a great use of our time to talk about George Conway or dead John McCain. … Why are we doing this?

When Mr. Trump was running for president, he promised to personally stop American companies from shutting down factories and moving plants abroad, warning that he would punish them with public backlash and higher taxes. Many companies scrambled to respond to his Twitter attacks, announcing jobs and investments in the United States — several of which never materialized.

But despite Mr. Trump’s efforts to compel companies to build and hire, they appear to be increasingly prioritizing their balance sheets over political backlash.

“I don’t think there’s as much fear,” said Gene Grabowski, who specializes in crisis communications for the public relations firm Kglobal. “At first it was a shock to the system, but now we’ve all adjusted. We take it in stride, and I think that’s what the business community is doing.”

There’s no specific stipulation that Milo must be heard, so it could be worse

President Trump is expected to issue an executive order Thursday directing federal agencies to tie research and education grants made to colleges and universities to more aggressive enforcement of the First Amendment, according to a draft of the order viewed by The Wall Street Journal.

The order instructs agencies including the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services and Defense to ensure that public educational institutions comply with the First Amendment, and that private institutions live up to their own stated free-speech standards.

The order falls short of what some university officials feared would be more sweeping or specific measures; it doesn’t prescribe any specific penalty that would result in schools losing research or other education grants as a result of specific policies.

Tech companies say that it is easier to identify content related to known foreign terrorist organizations such as ISIS and Al Qaeda because of information-sharing with law enforcement and industry-wide efforts, such as the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism, a group formed by YouTube, Facebook, Microsoft, and Twitter in 2017.

On Monday, for example, YouTube said on its Twitter account that it was harder for the company to stop the video of the shootings in Christchurch than to remove copyrighted content or ISIS-related content because YouTube’s tools for content moderation rely on “reference files to work effectively.” Movie studios and record labels provide reference files in advance and, “many violent extremist groups, like ISIS, use common footage and imagery,” YouTube wrote.

The cycle is self-reinforcing: The companies collect more data on what ISIS content looks like based on law enforcement’s myopic and under-inclusive views, and then this skewed data is fed to surveillance systems, Bloch-Wehba says. Meanwhile, consumers don’t have enough visibility in the process to know whether these tools are proportionate to the threat, whether they filter too much content, or whether they discriminate against certain groups, she says.

Two mystery litigants citing privacy concerns are making a last-ditch bid to keep secret some details in a lawsuit stemming from wealthy financier Jeffrey Epstein’s history of paying underage girls for sex.

Just prior to a court-imposed deadline Tuesday, two anonymous individuals surfaced to object to the unsealing of a key lower-court ruling in the case, as well as various submissions by the parties.

Both people filed their complaints in the New York-based 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which is overseeing the case. The two people said they could face unwarranted speculation and embarrassment if the court makes public records from the suit, in which Virginia Giuffre, an alleged Epstein victim, accused longtime Epstein friend Ghislaine Maxwell of engaging in sex trafficking by facilitating his sexual encounters with teenage girls. Maxwell has denied the charges.

Rescue teams in Mozambique are struggling to reach the thousands of people stranded on roofs and in trees and urgently need more helicopters and boats as post-cyclone flood waters continue to rise.

Rescue workers, military personnel and volunteers are rushing to save thousands of Mozambicans before flood levels rise further, but with four helicopters, a handful of boats and extremely difficult conditions, have only been able to save about 413 so far.

“I don’t even know if we’ve made a dent. There are just so many people. The scale is huge. We’re busy doing the best we can,” said Travis Trower from Rescue South Africa, adding that a lot of people had been washed away but those still alive, whom he had seen from helicopter flights, were in a very bad state.

More than 400 sq kilometres (150 sq miles) in the region are flooded, according to satellite images taken by the EU, and in some places the water is six metres (19ft) deep. At least 600,000 people are affected, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), ranging from those whose lives are in immediate danger to those who need other kinds of aid.

About 40 percent of the District’s lower-income neighborhoods experienced gentrification between 2000 and 2013, giving the city the greatest “intensity of gentrification” of any in the country, according to a studyreleased Tuesday by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition.

The District also saw the most African American residents — more than 20,000 — displaced from their neighborhoods during that time, mostly by affluent, white newcomers, researchers said. The District and Philadelphia were most “notable” for displacements of black residents, while Denver and Austin had the most Hispanic residents move. Nationwide, nearly 111,000 African Americans and more than 24,000 Hispanics moved out of gentrifying neighborhoods, the study found.

In an essay accompanying the study, Sabiyha Prince of Empower DC said the city “rolled out the proverbial red carpet” for tens of thousands of new residents in the past five years. But the new dog parks, bike lanes, condominiums and pricey restaurants that followed, she said, are not viewed as improvements by long-term residents, who can feel isolated because of losing neighbors, social networks and local businesses. Prince, an anthropologist, said longtime Washingtonians tell stories of “alienation and vulnerability in the nation’s capital.”